ArticleBritish journal of cancer2014
Dietary intake of acrylamide and endometrial cancer risk in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition cohort.
Article in British journal of cancer, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dietary Acrylamide Exposure and Cancer Risk: A Systematic Approach to Human Epidemiological Studies.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Pilot Study for the Dietary Assessment of Xenobiotics Derived from Food Processing in an Adult Spanish Sample.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- A Review of Dietary Intake of Acrylamide in Humans.Toxics · 2021Review
- Article
- The Effects of the Dietary and Nutrient Intake on Gynecologic Cancers.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Review
- Dietary acrylamide intake and the risk of endometrial or ovarian cancers in Japanese women.Cancer science · 2018Article
- hTERT promotes gastric intestinal metaplasia by upregulating CDX2 via NF-κB signaling pathway.Oncotarget · 2017Article
- Dietary intake of acrylamide and epithelial ovarian cancer risk in the european prospective investigation into cancer and nutrition (EPIC) cohort.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
43 authors at 20 institutions in 11 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThree prospective studies have evaluated the association between dietary acrylamide intake and endometrial cancer (EC) risk with inconsistent results. The objective of this study was to evaluate the association between acrylamide intake and EC risk: for overall EC, for type-I EC, and in never smokers and never users of oral contraceptives (OCs). Smoking is a source of acrylamide, and OC use is a protective factor for EC risk.
methodsCox regression was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for the association between acrylamide intake and EC risk in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) cohort. Acrylamide intake was estimated from the EU acrylamide monitoring database, which was matched with EPIC questionnaire-based food consumption data. Acrylamide intake was energy adjusted using the residual method.
resultsNo associations were observed between acrylamide intake and overall EC (n=1382) or type-I EC risk (n=627). We observed increasing relative risks for type-I EC with increasing acrylamide intake among women who both never smoked and were non-users of OCs (HRQ5vsQ1: 1.97, 95% CI: 1.08-3.62; likelihood ratio test (LRT) P-value: 0.01, n=203).
conclusionsDietary intake of acrylamide was not associated with overall or type-I EC risk; however, positive associations with type I were observed in women who were both non-users of OCs and never smokers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.